Glenn,
Here's an imminently sensible plan written by Lawrence Lessig for California that won't be adopted:
lessig.org
<Some Text Deleted....>
Yet it is one thing to have a bad clause in a constitution. It is quite another to rely upon it to become the Governor of a state as important as California. Whether Republican or Democrat, there is something deeply wrong about taking advantage of a constitutional mistake to become governor of one the most important states in the nation.
I can’t understand why the Democrats, or at least why the Davis supporters, don’t make this point clear. And more importantly, I can’t understand why Governor Davis doesn’t at least nominate a protest candidate — a candidate who says (1) this election is wrong, and (2) whether you like Davis or not, you should vote not to recall him on the basis of a constitutional mistake, and (3) after you vote not to recall him, you should vote for the protest candidate. That candidate would promise not to run for reelection — or for any office in California, since no one should benefit politically from a constitutional mistake — but would hold the governorship “in trust” until we have another election where the candidate with the most votes wins.
One might say, who could possibly resist such a loophole. That whether it is honorable or not, what politician would forgo the chance to become President or Governor, regardless of the means?
Yet we should remember that many believe that Nixon made essentially this choice when he refused to fight the results in Illinois and thus let Kennedy become President. In his moral universe, that’s not how an executive should become an executive.
It is a measure of this Enronera that neither our President nor over 200 candidates in this California recall election live up to the moral standards of even Richard Nixon. By whatever means, they will claim power. |
